From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751528Ab1HRSjv (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Aug 2011 14:39:51 -0400 Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:42559 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750764Ab1HRSju (ORCPT ); Thu, 18 Aug 2011 14:39:50 -0400 Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 20:36:59 +0200 From: Oleg Nesterov To: Matt Fleming Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 00/41] signal: Use set_current_blocked() Message-ID: <20110818183659.GA10353@redhat.com> References: <1313071035-12047-1-git-send-email-matt@console-pimps.org> <20110811160358.GA7989@redhat.com> <1313523659.3436.184.camel@mfleming-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com> <20110817170152.GA22499@redhat.com> <1313619446.2311.52.camel@mfleming-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com> <1313665755.2311.57.camel@mfleming-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1313665755.2311.57.camel@mfleming-mobl1.ger.corp.intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On 08/18, Matt Fleming wrote: > > On Wed, 2011-08-17 at 23:17 +0100, Matt Fleming wrote: > > > > This does look like a decent clean up, especially because so many > > architectures got this sequence wrong in the past. But yeah, it will > > require me to rewrite half my series ;-) > > > > Is it worth rewriting the series? Dunno. I'm not convinced that the > > wrapper buys us enough for that, Oh, I am not sure too. I almost regret I mentioned this cleanup. Just I was a bit suprised by how many arches do this wrong. See also below. > plus it'd increase the number of > patches. By 1. A single patch can convert the code to use set_current_blocked() and block_sigmask(). And probably the patch which adds block_sigmask() should change arch/x86 as well, this makes its purpose immediately clear. IOW, I'd prefer the patch I sent (with rename). But once again, I won't persist. > > Maybe it'd be better to do it as a separate set of patches? I don't think so... this means another series touching arch/* to make the very minor cleanup. > OK so, I went ahead and rewrote the series using your clean up. It's in > the 'oleg/set-current-blocked-v2' branch at, > > git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/mfleming/linux-2.6.git > > Would you mind taking a quick look and see which series you prefer? No, no, no. Matt, please choose the series which _you_ prefer. You are the author. I am fine either way. > I resend any patches. Yes. I think you should resend the whole series in any case. Because I think our discussion could confuse the maintainers. Can I ask you to CC them all in 00/XX ? In this case I can reply to 00 saying that I am going to take the whole series, unless the maintainer want to do this. Otherwise I should reply per-arch, this will certainly cause the confusion. And, Matt, if I take the patch and then we have any sort of conflict, you will have to help me with the git problems ;) My understanding of git magic is quite limited. Oleg.